About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 4
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN 3
CNN 2
CNNW 2
CSPAN2 2
KNTV (NBC) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
CNBC 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WETA 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 33
Search Results 0 to 32 of about 33 (some duplicates have been removed)
, former republican senator chuck hagel, came under fire from members of his own party during a very contentious confirmation hearing. >> name one person in your opinion who's intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> are we right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> senator hagel, please answer the question i asked. today, do you think unilateral sanctions would be a bad idea? >> all this raising questions about how effective chuck hagel will be if confirmed as secretary of defense. earlier this weekend, i sat down for a rare joint interview with the top military leadership the outgoing secretary f defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general martin dempsey. >>> secretary panetta, welcome back to "meet the press." general dempsey, welcome. let me start with the man that is poised to take your place. he underwent on thursday a pretty tough round of questioning. he seemed to struggle with a lot of the answers. of course this is chuck hagel, the former republican senator from nebraska. look at some of his answers. >
this is chuck hagel, the former republican senator from nebraska. look at some of his answers. >> i should have used another term, and i'm sorry. i would like to go back and change the words and the meaning. the bigger point is, what i was saying, i think -- what i meant to say, should have said, is recognizable. it's been recognized, is recognized. well, i said it. and i don't remember the context or when i said it. well, i said what i said. i said many, many things over many years. that's what i should have said. and thank you. >> secretary panetta, many of those answers did not satisfy a lot of republicans. senator roy blunt is going to vote no. he said his answers were too inconsistent particularly related to iran and israel. marco rubio said i've been deeply concerned about his plef previous comments. john barrasso, he appeared weak and wobbly. are you concerned? >> well, everyone you quoted is a republican, and it's pretty obvious that the political knives were out for chuck hagel. >> and you think that was totally personal, partisan? >> well, what disappointed me is they talked a lot abo
we have 68,000 young men and women serving there. >> are you confident of chuck hagel? have you spent time with him? you guys have to have a partnership. secretary of defense, chairman of the joint chiefs of staffs, whether you like each other or are not, are you confident you can have a good relationship with him? >> i have spent time with senator hagel, including when he was teaching over at georgetown, on strategic issues. and in helping prepare him for this confirmation hearings, we had several opportunities to talk about strategy. and i found him well prepared and very thoughtful about it. >> were his answers to you better than the answers you saw there? >> i'm not going to grade his homework. but in my conversations, he was well prepared, articulate, concise. >> and you're confident he can do the job? >> i'm not going to speak about confidence. he could be my boss. when is the last time you saw a subordinate discuss the confidence in his boss? my personal contacts with him have been very positive. if he's confirmed, i look forward to working with him. >> senator lindsey graham s
currency war? we're going have to talk about that all next up. >>> later in the show, is chuck hagel's nomination going down in flames? it's definitely frozen for now. hagel has yet to turn over the information of who his foreign funding sources were after he left the u.s. senate. that could kill him. we'll have the latest. and please don't forget, free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity. that includes lower spending and limited government. i'm larry kudlow. we'll be right back. ♪ get ready for a lot more of that new-plane smell. we're building the youngest, most modern fleet among the largest us airlines to ensure that you are more comfortable and connected than ever. we are becoming a new american. all right that's a fifth-floor probleok.. not in my house! ha ha ha! ha ha ha! no no no! not today! ha ha ha! ha ha ha! jimmy how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? happier than dikembe mutumbo blocking a shot. get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or mor . welcome back. we'll take a quick look at the stock mark
secretary leon panetta came out in support of chuck hagel. president obama's choice for defense secretary. >> what you've heard from republicans thus far has been, why -- where is the calvary in all of this, why didn't the military over the course of what we've been told was a seven-hour incident if you can call it an incident. why over the course of seven hours was there not a strike team of some sort that could be put into benghazi to try to help out. on the show today, i had not just leon panetta, but as well the chairman of the joint chiefs, martin dempsey, and i asked them that very question, like why wouldn't you on 9/11, have troops sort of ready? and dempsey said to me, we did, the minute we knew the incident happened, the secretary of defense said, move some troops, scramble some troops, get them ready, let us know what their transit time would be. that's where it ended. i said, why didn't you just move them at that moment when you knew there was trouble. here's what dempsey said. >> we can't be a replacement. it was 9/11 elsewhere in the world not just in libya. >> that's pretty
the qualifications of chuck hagel. i served with chuck hagel. he is a conservative republican representing the ultra liberal state of nebraska. he served with distinction in the united states senate as a senator, served on the foreign relations committee, armed services committee, intelligence committee. he's a man of quality, a man of courage. not just being able to come and give a speech here on the senate floor. during the vietnam war, he volunteered to go into combat. that's what he chose to do. because he thought it was the patriotic thing to do for his country, our country. and his family felt that way. he and his brother went togeth together. they didn't go to push pencils. they carried rifles, had strapped to their sides grenad grenades. he was wounded twice. he's an enlisted man. he didn't walk around ordering people to do things. people were ordering him around what to do. except when it came to his brother, who he saved his brother's life in combat in vietnam. and they are filibustering him. that's what they're doing. i'm going to go call chuck hagel when i finish here and say, i'm sorry,
could work this week on the chuck hagel nomination. the question remains whether or not republicans will block the nomination with a filibuster. the president traveling to push for slacker gun laws. with the nation focusing on the super bowl, we want to turn to washington's role on regulating the nfl. we will use super bowl sunday to talk about government regulations when it comes to the issue of steroids or head injuries. the phone lines are open. let's begin with a look at some of the headlines courtesy of the museum. from "the san francisco chronicle" -- from "the baltimore sun" -- let's turn to the politics and policy behind the nfl. this is a story a few days ago from "the washington post." outlining a plan and a letter to the executive director of the players union. they agreed as part of a 2011 collective bargaining agreement that the players should be tested for hgh, but the two sides of that agreed. two seasons have been played without it. last weekend in new orleans, roger goodell was asked a number of questions including one on the issue of head injuries. here is more fro
on the other side who are supporting hagel, senator hagel for being the next secretary of defense. .. that letter of solidarity for israel. the same. the same thing as a clearing the rain and revolution guard a terrorist group. he was one of only four who did that. so i would only say, this is not a filibuster. everybody knows it's not a filibuster. i hope the media is listing that they are. this is the same thing required by the democrats and the cases john doe tim steve johnson, the case of rob portman. it is the prerogative of the senate. it's not a filibuster. they nearly won a 60-vote margin. i commented earlier that we had a republican in the white house in a majority in the senate. i was here and never objected to that. then of course you had kathleen sebelius right now, cabinet position. secretary of commerce john brace and objected to him. so the only issue here is the 60-vote margin. it's not a filibuster on the last thing i say is i will read again to their last speaker and are very good friend is the chairman of the committee when he said the other day and i wholeheart
in confirming some of president obama's key appointees. chuck hagel at defense, john brennan at the cia, and now senator mccain saying he is not ready to call it a day on all of this. a congress hearing -- >> then you ought to have your facts straight. >> reporter: after congressional hearing. >> who responsible then? >> reporter: republican senator john mccain challenge, the white house on its response to benghazi. now he is going further on nbc's "meet the press." >> so there are many, many questions and we have had a massive cover-up. >> a cover-up of what? i'm just saying you, a cover-up of what? >> i'll be glad to send you a list of questions that have not been answered. >> reporter: the white house says it's given answers. conducted 20 briefings for congress. officials have testified at ten hearings, answered how queries. it all adds up to 10,000 pages of documents. just last week, mccain himself told cnn recent responses on benghazi were, quote, adequate. so, is this just politics? when we asked mccain's office what other questions the senator still had, we were referred to this january p
his remarks on benghazi. do you think hagel's confirmation will go ahead more swiftly that leon panetta has been there to testify? >> one of the requests made by a number of republicans was for a hearing on benghazi. there's a legitimate and urgent concern about protecting our state department personnel, public servants abroad. i recently returned from a trip with senators mccain and graham and others, bipartisan trip, and we saw very directly the potential threats to our state department and other personnel. so i think there is an effort and it's articulated and reflected in today's hearing that this kind of review precede the confirmation of senator hagel. i believe he will be confirmed. that vote will probably be next week in the senate armed services committee where i serve, and i think that there has been little shifting of democratic support and obviously a statement by senator mccain that he would not filibuster it. so i think the chances are very high he will be confirmed. >> one thing that's been pointed to me is general dempsey will acknowledge that the u.s. military d
to the same committee room that we will take you to now. we went there to hear defense nominee chuck hagel's testimony. they will come in soon. a little bit later, at 2:30 p.m. in the senate intelligence committee, john brennan's confirmation will be life. you see senator mccain. you have the ranking for the senate armed service committee. this should begin in a second. let us watch. we will cavill and to hear from defense secretary leon panetta and general martin dempsey about the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi that resulted in the death of four americans. one week ago today, this committee heard from senator chuck hegel -- hagel to be the next defense secretary. the center of south carolina said he would put a hold on former senator hagel's nomination unless leon panetta agreed to testify. this is the first of two harris we will show you today. this and later this afternoon, the confirmation hearing for cia director nominee, john brennan, currently the counter-terrorism chief. >> good morning, everybody. we welcome secretary of defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint
nomination than was chuck hagel the week before. he was far more confident, far more informed, authoritative. but this is the first time it was ever debated, the subject. i mean it's gone undebated. and i have to concede that much of the criticism, i think from conservative press is absolutely valid. if this were george w. bush and dick cheney and we had increased by sixfold the number of unmanned attacks on other countries that are not combatant countries, that were not at war with, there would have been far more hue and cry. and it is interesting that the president, the only criticism in the president seems to be among a few liberals, and the support seems to be from people like john bolton-- and so it's a debate i think we have to have, we should have and it's been cloaked in secrecy and secrecy is the sacrosanct secular religion of this city. >> woodruff: so this has stirred it up? >> i think so, because of the leaked memo and the system, we are having a debate about drones. and i guess if i want a drone policy i want it run by a franciscan, not a jesuit. but he didn't really defend it,
confirms a new defense secretary. the president has nominated former senator chuck hagel. this is just under an hour. ♪ [applause] ♪ >> review. ♪ ♪ ["yankee doodle" plays] >> ladies and gentleman, please stand for the playing of the united states national anthem. >> present arms. >> present arms. ["the star-spangled banner" plays] >> please be seated. [indiscernible] >> ready. hut. ladies and gentlemen, general dempsey. [applause] >> mr. president, secretary and mrs. panetta, ambassadors, members of congress, men and women of the armed forces of the united states, especially our wounded warriors, and we cannot forget bravo. i was hoping bravo would be out there for the inspection of troops, but apparently jeremy thought differently. it is an honor to be here for this event. we're here to show our profound respect and thanks to secretary panetta. i recall play "the tempest," which is a nice metaphor, and i like to think of you as the prospero of public service. the secretary has used his arts to imbue a sense of public service in generations of the men and women. and like that k
carolina senator lindsey graham who threatened to hold up the confirmation for chuck hagel, his successor. so what did the president know about the benghazi attack september 11, when did he know about it and what did he do about it? sources i talked to say panetta and others are carrying out the orders of the commander-in-chief. so what were they and how were they handled. expect fireworks. rick: later on this afternoon the president's nominee the head of the cia takes center stage. >> reporter: expect john brenner to get plenty of questions about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques during this time at cia. he left there in 2005. at the white house they are emphasizing brennan's experience. >> mr. brennan brings, i think, not on a vast amount of experience, but a significant perspective on the battles that we wage in this effort. and the right way to conduct them. so the president believes the senate should and will confirm john brennan expeditiously. >> reporter: expect him to get questions about how involved he was in interrogation techniques at the cia. rick: senator lindsey g
, john brennan and for defense secretary, chuck hagel unless the president provides more information on the september 2012 attack on our consulate in benghazi, libya. listen to this. >> how could they say after panetta and dempsey said it was a terrorist attack that night, how could the president say for two weeks after the attack it was the result of a video? how could susan rice come on to show to say there is no evidence of a terrorist attack when sick tear of defense and joint chiefs knew that that night? i think that was a misleading narrative three weeks before our election. >> he is hanging onto this in a big way. joining me, kt mcfarland, fox news security analyst . what do you think he is saying, kt? >> what he is talking about is the most significant part. and that is the president had nothing to do with this. that the secretary of defense and the chairman of joint chiefs of staff now said at the beginning of this attack american embassy under attack, american ambassador gone missing they told the president and that was it. the president had nothing more to do with it. mart
Search Results 0 to 32 of about 33 (some duplicates have been removed)